Paper 1 is a source exam, not an essay: Paper 1 checks how well you read, use, and judge sources — not how much history you can recall. You get four sources on one case study and answer four set questions.
Here is the best news about Paper 1. The question types never change: every exam asks the same four things, in the same order, worth the same marks.
So you can drill a fixed method for each one long before you ever see the sources.
Your own knowledge of the conquest still matters, but only the last 9-mark question rewards it directly. The first three questions are won or lost purely on how you handle the provenance and content of the sources in front of you.
Your case study is Conquest and its impact. One strand is Muslim rule in Spain and the fall of Granada in 1492 fall of Granada.
The other strand is the Spanish conquest of Mexico and Peru between 1519 and 1551, when conquistadors like Cortés and Pizarro toppled the Aztec and Inca empires.
Whichever strand a source comes from, the same skills carry you. You read each source, judge it as evidence, and — only at the end — bring in facts of your own.
- Read the provenance line every time. It tells you the author, date and type of source. It is free information, and it does half the work on the value question for you.
- OPVL is the method for the value-and-limitations question. It turns a source into evidence a historian can weigh.
- Watch for common source types. A chronicle appears in the Granada strand, and a conquistador's despatch or a Nahua account appears in the Mexico and Peru strand.
Free preview
This is the free notes preview
You're reading the free notes. Aimnova Pro unlocks the full study experience — and you can try it with your first topic free to keep:
- FlashcardsLock in vocabulary and key terms with spaced repetition.
- Practice questionsAnswer exam-style questions and get instant AI marking.
- Mock exams & past-paper vaultSit full mocks and see exactly how examiners award marks.
- Personalised study planA daily plan built around your exam date and weak areas.
Each question is unlocked by its command word — the verb that tells you exactly what to do. Learn what each one is asking, and the method that earns the marks follows.
Q1(a) — Comprehension [3 marks]
Starts 'What, according to Source X, were…'. State three separate points the source actually makes — each clear point earns 1 mark. Stay inside the source and add no outside knowledge. Keep the three points short and distinct so the examiner can tick three.
Q1(b) — Message [2 marks]
Starts 'What does Source X suggest about…', usually about an image, engraving or map — for example a picture of Cortés meeting Moctezuma. Give the overall message — what the source wants you to think or feel — and back it with one detail. Do not just describe what you see; say what it hints at.
Q2 — Value and limitations [4 marks]
Starts 'With reference to its origin, purpose and content, analyse the value and limitations of Source X…'. Use the provenance line. Give a value AND a limitation, each tied to a real feature, and link both back to the exact topic named. Frame it as 'BECAUSE it was written by… FOR…, it is useful for… but limited because…'.
Q3 — Compare and contrast [6 marks]
Starts 'Compare and contrast what Sources X and Y reveal about…' — for instance about why the Aztecs were defeated. Give both similarities and differences, and link the two sources to each other. Aim for about three linked matches and three linked differences. Never write two separate paragraphs that never meet.
Q4 — Judgement [9 marks]
Starts 'Using the sources and your own knowledge, evaluate the view that…'. This is a mini-essay: short intro, both sides using the sources as evidence, your own facts woven in, and a clear verdict at the end. It is the only question where knowing the history of the conquest pays off directly.
Comprehend → Message → OPVL → Compare → Judge (3-2-4-6-9).
| Question | Marks | Command word | What wins the marks |
|---|---|---|---|
| Q1(a) | 3 | What, according to… | Three separate points from the source |
| Q1(b) | 2 | What does X suggest… | One backed-up message |
| Q2 | 4 | Analyse value and limitations | Value AND limitation tied to origin, purpose, content |
| Q3 | 6 | Compare and contrast | Linked similarities AND differences |
| Q4 | 9 | Using sources and own knowledge… | Both sides + own facts + verdict |
Source-handling (Q1–Q3)
- Stay INSIDE the sources
- No outside knowledge needed
- Reward technique: points, message, OPVL, linking
- Worth 15 of the 24 marks
- Win these with method, not memory
Judgement (Q4)
- Use sources AND your own knowledge of the conquest
- Needs facts the sources do not give you
- Reward argument: both sides plus a verdict
- Worth 9 marks — the biggest single question
- Win this with knowledge AND a clear verdict
Turning a fact into Q4 evidence: Suppose Q4 asks whether Spanish weapons were the main reason the Aztecs fell. A source might describe Spanish guns and horses at the siege of Tenochtitlan in 1521. Your own knowledge then adds what the source leaves out: the thousands of Tlaxcalan allies who hated Aztec rule, and the smallpox that swept the city before it fell. Source detail plus wider context is exactly what the top band rewards.
Feeling unprepared for exams?
Get a clear study plan, practice with real questions, and know exactly where you stand before exam day. No more guessing.
How this is tested: Q2 always uses OPVL. The big trap is to describe the source instead of judging it as evidence. A second trap is treating bias as if it makes a source useless — bias is itself a value, because it shows what people wanted believed.
Source B (invented for practice): Source B — a letter sent by Hernán Cortés to the King of Spain, 1520. 'With barely five hundred men, and trusting in God, I have brought the great city of the Mexica under Your Majesty's crown. Their idols and cruel sacrifices I have cast down, and the natives now beg to serve so mighty a king. I ask only more men, and the honours my service has earned.'
With reference to its origin, purpose and content, analyse the value and limitations of Source B for a historian studying the Spanish conquest of Mexico.
Model answer plan
See the mark-by-mark plan — for / against / judgement, with marking guidance — in study mode.
Common mistakes: 1. Describing the source instead of judging it. 2. Treating bias as useless — bias limits facts but is valuable for attitudes. 3. Forgetting to link back to the named topic (here, the conquest of Mexico). 4. Giving only a value or only a limitation — Q2 needs both. 5. Inventing provenance — use only what the attribution line states.